The Abbott government will reportedly unveil a target for a reduction in Australia’s greenhouse emissions of at least 26% below 2005 levels by 2030 – less ambitious than most other developed countries.
Conservationists and climate campaigners said the pledge, to be taken to the United Nations meeting in Paris in December, would be “pathetically inadequate”.
Business groups had been pushing for a promise closer to 30% below 2005 levels and have also been pleading with the Coalition to drop its opposition to buying emissions permits offshore, which would dramatically lower the cost of meeting the promise.
Modelling for the government by leading economist professor Warwick McKibbin is understood to have found the target would shave between 0.2% and 0.4% from GDP in 2030 if international permits were allowed, but at least twice that if they were not.
The pledge is lower than those made by comparable developed economies including the United States, the European Union and Canada, but the government argues it is proportionate because of Australia’s higher population growth and the higher economic costs of global climate action on coal exports.
It is understood the target will offer 26% cuts as a minimum, with the possibility of a 28% target as the economic costs become clearer.
The US has promised cuts of between 26% and 28% by 2025, or about 41% by 2030, the European Union 40% of 1990 levels by 2030 (about 34% based on 2005 levels), Canada cuts of 30% and the UK cuts equivalent to 48%. Japan – struggling with the impact of the Fukushima disaster on its nuclear industry – has promised a cut of 25% on 2005 levels. The average of developed nation emission reductions, using the 2005 base year, is about 36% by 2030.
The target, to be considered by the Coalition party room on Tuesday morning, is also well short of the cuts that the independent Climate Change Authority recommended as Australia’s fair share of a global effort to limit global warming to 2C.
The CCA recommended a reduction of 40% to 60% on 2000 levels by 2030, which equates to a 45% to 63% cut from the 2005 base year.
Labor’s national conference promised to listen to advice from bodies such as the CCA, but Labor has not yet committed to a specific target.
“We want to see the modelling before we make a decision, but 26% certainly puts us well towards the back of the pack compared with equivalent countries,” Labor’s environment spokesman, Mark Butler, said.
The chief executive of the Climate Institute, John Connor, said 26% would be “pathetically inadequate” and still leave Australia as “the highest per capita emitter in the world”.
“All the research shows we can reduce our emissions by much more even with higher population growth,” he said.
Both major parties committed to a cut of between 5% and 25% by 2020. Australia is likely to meet a 5% target, primarily because of lower electricity demand and the closure of heavy manufacturing.
The pledge will focus attention on the Coalition’s Direct Action policy, which most analysis suggests cannot meet deeper emission cuts without significant modification.
- This story was modified on 11 August to correct the percentage of GDP the new emissions target would cost, according to government modelling